Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

How to Stay Safe in DeFi: A Simple Guide to Evaluate Project Safety

The collapse of FTX proved the importance of self-custody and risk management.

But it’s so easy to lose money in DeFi if you are not careful with many exploits, rug pulls, contract bugs around.

In this blog I’d like to share how to evaluate safety of DeFi protocols to protect your assets.

It’s great if you’re an experienced smart contract developer and can verify the code yourself. But most of us aren’t.

It leaves us with no other choice, but to evaluate projects based on other data, that involves some degree of trust.

Total Value Lock, ultimate proof of security?

It’s no secret that the majority evaluate DeFi projects by how much value is deposited to the smart contracts. So, TVL is the ultimate proof of trust.

The higher the Total Value Locked, the higher the implied security of a protocol. If a lot of money is deposited, it means ‘someone’ did due diligence, and that protocol is secure.

Unfortunately, it gives a false sense of security. And high TVL protocols are actively targeted by hackers. At the same time, low TVL doesn’t mean a protocol is not secure.

Take a look at the top DeFi protocols by TVL.

  • Do you think that the TVL represents the level of security/safety?
  • Is there any protocol you wouldn’t trust with your money? Why?

There might be biases in you based on what you read online.

Trust, but verify?

‘Don’t trust, verify’ is the reason we have smart contract audits.

If that wasn’t the case, we might not need audits, because code is open source and community could find all the issues in the code. Yet the community might not have the right motivation, incentives or expertise to verify code.

Auditors are supposed to have the right technical expertise, but at the end of the day, we also have to trust them to do the right job.

Remember Twitter backlash against Certik because a few of their audited protocols ended up hacked?

Audit companies are building their reputation too. If the protocols they audit (and evaluated as safe) are exploited, then it shows lack of expertise. In fact, Certik has audited 3,422 projects, so no wonder some of them got hacked or had a bug.

Just having an audit doesn’t mean the protocol is safe. I’ve seen projects proudly announcing ‘Completed audit’, but when you read the audit the safety score is actually low.

The lesson is not to trust the announcements blindly, but verify the result by reading the actual audit.

What if you don’t read the audits?

The majority doesn’t read the audits anyway.

Knowing that Certik has a dashboard with all their audited projects. You can check the ‘Trust Score’ with higher number implying safety.

https://www.certik.com/

Other auditors like Hacken has a similar dashboard, or you could simply read the audit summary. Check the example, of Trader Joe’s audit done by Paladin.

You can see here that Trader Joe fixed high and medium severity issues, but not all low severity issues has been resolved.

https://paladinsec.co/projects/trader-joe-launchpeg/

Audit is just a start.

A lot more is needed to evaluate safety:

  • Adequate testing
  • Bounty campaigns
  • Documentation clarity
  • Admin controls
  • Oracle documentation

and much more… It’s a nightmare to verify it all yourself.

I really like what DefiSafety is doing. Its Process Quality Review verifies protocols and gives them a safety score.

https://www.defisafety.com/app?orderBy=finalScore

According to the PQR results, Liquity Protocol, Synthetix and Angle Protocol are the safest of all verified DeFi protocols.

On DefiSafety you can then check every element and see where the protocol scores the best/worst.

For example, Liquidy still needs Formal Verification.

Additionally, you can start by rating your portfolio safety on Exponential DeFi.

Its ‘Rate my wallet’ feature provides you with a custom risk analysis of your current investments. For example, $4.5M of Tetranode’s assets are deposited into riskier (C rank) protocols.

Elemental DeFi gives a score based on the project evaluation.Assessment takes into account asset risk, code quality and blockchain security to which the assets are deposited.

I like their easy to understand explanation of risks.

For example, take a look at Abracadabra’s MIM. It warns of SPELL being used as collateral which could result in bad debt.

If in doubt, ask!

Finally, I recommend joining the project community groups and ask:

Do they have an insurance fund?

Do they avoid questions?

What are they doing to increase security?

I asked Stargate team if they had an insurance fund in case they get hacked, but it sometimes more difficult to get an answer than I thought, which poses red flags.

But whatever happens, DeFi is still young, so better not to put all your assets into one protocol.

Do you have more useful tips how to evaluate projects and protect your assets?

Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • BTC Surpasses $79,000

    Market data shows that BTC has surpassed $79,000, currently priced at $79,066.69, with a 24-hour decline of 1.91%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • BTC Surpasses $79,000

    Market data shows that BTC has surpassed $79,000, currently priced at $79,066.69, with a 24-hour decline of 1.91%. The market is highly volatile, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • Jack Ma Increases Stake, Buying Over HKD 600 Million in Alibaba's Hong Kong Stocks

    According to sources speaking to the Science and Technology Innovation Board Daily on the 25th, as Alibaba initiates a placement financing, Alibaba founder Jack Ma has been continuously increasing his stake in Alibaba's Hong Kong stocks, with the total amount exceeding HKD 600 million, expressing strong confidence in Alibaba's AI prospects.

  • Jack Ma Increases Stake, Buys Over HKD 600 Million in Alibaba Shares

    According to sources speaking to the Science and Technology Innovation Board Daily on the 25th, as Alibaba initiates a placement financing, Alibaba founder Jack Ma has been increasing his stake in Alibaba's Hong Kong shares for several consecutive days, with the total amount exceeding HKD 600 million, expressing strong confidence in Alibaba's AI prospects.

  • BTC Falls Below $79,000

    Market data shows that BTC has fallen below $79,000, currently priced at $78,993.01, with a 24-hour increase of 1.85%. The market is experiencing significant volatility, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • BTC Falls Below $79,000

    Market data shows that BTC has fallen below $79,000, currently priced at $78,993.01, with a 24-hour increase of 1.85%. The market is experiencing significant fluctuations, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • BTC Falls Below $80,000

    Market data shows that BTC has fallen below $80,000, currently priced at $79,983.76, with a 24-hour increase of 3.33%. The market is highly volatile, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • BTC Drops Below $80,000

    Market data shows that BTC has dropped below $80,000, currently priced at $79,983.76, with a 24-hour increase of 3.33%. The market is highly volatile, so please ensure proper risk management.

  • Hyperliquid Policy Center Urges US SEC and CFTC to Adopt Unified Perpetual Contract Framework

    On August 25, the Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) submitted comments to the US SEC and CFTC, stating that the two agencies have been striving to find answers regarding the classification of perpetual contracts over the past year. HPC believes that perpetual contracts for stocks, which possess traditional features of futures contracts, can be classified as securities futures. HPC urges the US SEC and CFTC to establish a unified classification system for perpetual contracts, based on the characteristics of each contract and its trading methods, grouping similar products together regardless of whether they reference Bitcoin, crude oil, or individual securities. HPC calls for the US SEC and CFTC to take the following four actions: 1. Confirm that the definition of securities futures includes the established features of futures contracts, allowing cash-settled stock perpetual contracts with these features to be listed as securities futures. 2. Retain the flexibility that trading venues currently have in making product listing decisions. 3. Maintain consistency in classification between the two agencies so that perpetual contracts, regardless of the underlying asset, receive the same threshold classification. 4. Modernize the securities futures framework to revitalize the category and adapt to new product structures.

  • Hyperliquid Policy Center Urges Unified Perpetual Contract Framework from US SEC and CFTC

    On August 25, the Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) submitted comments to the US SEC and CFTC, stating that both agencies have been working over the past year to find answers regarding the classification of perpetual contracts. HPC believes that perpetual contracts for stocks, which possess traditional characteristics of futures contracts, can be classified as security futures. HPC urges the US SEC and CFTC to establish a unified classification system for perpetual contracts, based on the characteristics of each contract and its trading methods, grouping similar products together regardless of whether they reference Bitcoin, crude oil, or individual securities. HPC calls for the US SEC and CFTC to take the following four actions: 1. Confirm that the definition of security futures includes the established characteristics of futures contracts, allowing cash-settled stock perpetual contracts with these characteristics to be listed as security futures. 2. Retain the flexibility that trading venues currently have in product listing decisions. 3. Maintain consistency in classification between the two agencies so that perpetual contracts, regardless of the underlying asset, receive the same threshold classification. 4. Modernize the security futures framework to revitalize the category and adapt to new product structures.